Shocking: Black Teen Unemployment Rate 41.6%

[Peikko 1,575]

The reason is a cultivated underclass dependent on welfare because if they try to get jobs and get ahead, they lose more than they can gain.

in our state, for example, a family of four (single mom and 3 kids) can receive in benefits the before tax income equivilent of more than $50,000 per year!!!!!!!!! Before TAX equivilent. Add 22% to that figure what they need to make in a base salary to equal that AFTER tax. Most of the people have poor educations, no job experience, no good employers in their neighborhoods. If they get a job, they will lose some of those benefits. Even on a $ for $ basis, WHY would anyone want to work? They do not have the education or skills to make anywhere near that amount of money. The BEST choice for their family is welfare and public aid.

This contains people, generation after generation in this lifestyle. It is not the policy of the current administration, it has been going on since just after the civil rights movement got traction. It was no longer possible to legislate black people into certain neighborhoods, lifestyles and conditions...now they are economically lured there and trapped as solidily as if we built a wall around them. Yeah, it snaps up a smaller percentage of white people also. So what? You think the powers that be want white trash any more than they want blacks in their neighborhhod? In the process they destroyed the once very strong black family unit. That actually surprises me a bit. Blacks had, at one time, a very strong family unit culture. The replacement of the black father by the "Great White father" has done more than anything to destroy the futures of children.

The policies in fact are not "failed" but are wildly successful in doing exactly what was intended.

The low level jobs formerly held by black people have been filled by illegal aliens who have no rights at all and are forced to work because they receive no benefits. It is perhaps the most damning evidence...people who do not receive these benfits are willing "to do work Americans won't do" and people that do receive them are unemployed at the highest rate in the nation.

Like I said, it is mathmatical. And was entirely predictable when it was established, And to top it off, if you disagree with the policies, you get called a "racist"

Who is the they you blame this on? I am a little confused as to who is supposed to benefit from specifically targeting black people to live in government funded ghettos. Surely that's a costly exercise, so who would benefit from that being a policy?

Edited August 3, 2013 by The Truth™

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

They're about as likely to hire an equally qualified black guy with a clean background as they are to hire a white convict. They're also more likely to call an applicant with a name that suggests the applicant is white than one where the name suggest the applicant is black. That type of institutional racism - which is very much alive - may have a lot to do with the high unemployment rates in that segment of the population.

You are distorting the information which is why you will not link to it. This is a widely quoted "statistic" by low information voters. You made the mistake of saying "equally qualified". The "statistics" quoted are overall comparisons of the population. Such overall comparisons eliminate any possibility of ever fixing the problem. Of course, that is the intent. Your intent was...who knows actually? Probably just a mistake or ignorance. When you compare overall rates you eliminate the disparity in education, for example, between the races. But that disparity is calculated and intended to get the results you quote.

Actually compare instead the equally qualified and educated black person with a white person and the picture changes dramatically. The key here being education. But blacks are lured into a lifestyle of welfare and trapped there by poor education in their neghborhoods, poor job opportunities and sterotypes cultivated to be exactly what they are.

Institutional racism absolutely exists. The way to eliminate it is to eliminate the institutions that cultivate it.

We need to change the institution to be one that manages and promotes individual achievement and requires that people work to that goal in order to receive benefits. Th egoal should be, for everyone, individual achievement and individual liberty. Some people aren't there yet but need to be on that path. I have no trouble helping people, particularly those that were purposely trapped by racists in government institutions, but they need to be headed in the direction of freedom.

Likely will never happen because the reason for the "help" is to trap the people. The people providing the "help" want it that way.

They will sell their plans to low information people with comparisons such as the one above.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Who is the they you blame this on? I am a little confused as to who is supposed to benefit from specifically targeting black people to live in government funded ghettos. Surely that's a costly exercise, so who would benefit from that being a policy?

The same racists who formerly subjugated blacks with legislation. The people who support the programs that cause this problem. Government that needs a voting base of a permanent underclass. Democrats mostly. But political party is not important.

Yes, it is costly, it was cheaper to just legislate them into ghettos, segregation, but hey, it has to be done, so you may as well get votes from it. Th ewelfare system costs billions of dollars and is one of the government's largest single budget items...but it is necessary in order that they can accomplish what they want and not be called "racists".

You pay for it.

Who benefits? White people. Overall our children are more likely to be hired even if they are convicts than Marvin's children are. Haven't you been paying attention? You think the Democrats were going to give up slavery, that they fought a war costing 600,000 lives to keep, give up segregation that they almost went to war again over, and be equal with black people?

Do you realize that Democrats were willing to sacrifice more people's lives to save the institution of slavery than they were to free Europe from the Nazis? Democrats stood by and watched the Nazis bomb England for 2 years without getting involved but killed 600,000 of their own people trying to save slavery.

One level of racism simply replaced the last one. Slavery became socially unacceptable so we "freed the slaves" and allowed black people to be oppressed for another century by law. That became socially unacceptable so we replaced segregation by law with economic and political segregation which as been equally effective. And does not appear "racist" even though it is perhaps the most racist. The beneficiaries have always been the same

Edited August 3, 2013 by Gary and Alla

[Peikko 1,575]

You are distorting the information which is why you will not link to it. This is a widely quoted "statistic" by low information voters. You made the mistake of saying "equally qualified". The "statistics" quoted are overall comparisons of the population. Such overall comparisons eliminate any possibility of ever fixing the problem. Of course, that is the intent. Your intent was...who knows actually? Probably just a mistake or ignorance. When you compare overall rates you eliminate the disparity in education, for example, between the races. But that disparity is calculated and intended to get the results you quote.

Actually compare instead the equally qualified and educated black person with a white person and the picture changes dramatically. The key here being education. But blacks are lured into a lifestyle of welfare and trapped there by poor education in their neghborhoods, poor job opportunities and sterotypes cultivated to be exactly what they are.

Institutional racism absolutely exists. The way to eliminate it is to eliminate the institutions that cultivate it.

We need to change the institution to be one that manages and promotes individual achievement and requires that people work to that goal in order to receive benefits. Th egoal should be, for everyone, individual achievement and individual liberty. Some people aren't there yet but need to be on that path. I have no trouble helping people, particularly those that were purposely trapped by racists in government institutions, but they need to be headed in the direction of freedom.

Likely will never happen because the reason for the "help" is to trap the people. The people providing the "help" want it that way.

They will sell their plans to low information people with comparisons such as the one above.

As conspiracy theories goes, this one displays all the classic symptoms. Go on then, go for broke, tell us who benefits from this brilliant policy? Congressional Democrats? The Democratic Elite? Obama, that's where he gets all his voters? I have heard this one before of course, not least from you but it's not coming across as any more plausible now than it ever has.

[Danno 1,228]

They're about as likely to hire an equally qualified black guy with a clean background as they are to hire a white convict. They're also more likely to call an applicant with a name that suggests the applicant is white than one where the name suggest the applicant is black. That type of institutional racism - which is very much alive - may have a lot to do with the high unemployment rates in that segment of the population.

You might be on to something with this hiring by race trend though it seems to be"color blind."

NO matter the color of the employer, they seek out people they relate to best.

For instance When I go to any major city, one can't help but notice the public employees are mostly black from managers, chiefs of Police, Bus drivers and administrators.... so these Blacks are doing the hiring and whenever a Black person can be hired,....... they are.

I got a ticket in Atlanta a few years ago and through some coding error by the cop I was required to go all the way back there and appear.

Every person working there, from the Janitor to the security, to the D.A. to the Judge was Black. I was treated fairly so I am not complaining about my experience just noting employment trends.

We see the same thing in the federal hiring as well. Blacks are hired at percentages in the hundreds of times.... beyond what their population would suggest if hiring were color blind.

This is exactly why Blacks have been hit harder by Gov't cutbacks.... they are employed more often by Gov't and so when layoffs come, they bare the brunt of it more sharply.

For instance I believe 75-80% of letter carriers in Chicago are Black while I think the Black population is around 40s.

So this trend to use color as a factor in hiring is not exclusive to any one group.

The Percentage of Blacks in the EEOC, the Veterans Admin. the Transportation dept are all astounding which leads me to my long held observation-

"Diversity simply means LESS WHITE PEOPLE"

[Peikko 1,575]

The same racists who formerly subjugated blacks with legislation. The people who support the programs that cause this problem. Government that needs a voting base of a permanent underclass. Democrats mostly. But political party is not important.

Yes, it is costly, it was cheaper to just legislate them into ghettos, segregation, but hey, it has to be done, so you may as well get votes from it. Th ewelfare system costs billions of dollars and is one of the government's largest single budget items...but it is necessary in order that they can accomplish what they want and not be called "racists".

You pay for it.

Who benefits? White people. Overall our children are more likely to be hired even if they are convicts than Marvin's children are. Haven't you been paying attention? You think the Democrats were going to give up slavery, that they fought a war costing 600,000 lives to keep, give up segregation that they almost went to war again over, and be equal with black people?

Do you realize that Democrats were willing to sacrifice more people's lives to save the institution of slavery than they were to free Europe from the Nazis? Democrats stood by and watched the Nazis bomb England for 2 years without getting involved but killed 600,000 of their own people trying to save slavery.

One level of racism simply replaced the last one. Slavery became socially unacceptable so we "freed the slaves" and allowed black people to be oppressed for another century by law. That became socially unacceptable so we replaced segregation by law with economic and political segregation which as been equally effective. And does not appear "racist" even though it is perhaps the most racist. The beneficiaries have always been the same

You have created your devil but it's not a credible one. This idea that Democrats sustain a system of social slavery in order to get votes just doesn't add up. Eliminating Democrats will not miraculously create Utopia. Democrats are not a universal evil to be attacked at every turn. This theory you adhere to is pretty insane.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

You are distorting the information which is why you will not link to it. This is a widely quoted "statistic" by low information voters. You made the mistake of saying "equally qualified". The "statistics" quoted are overall comparisons of the population.

That's utter bullshite. I shouldn't be surprised. It came from you after all. Bullshite is all you ever bring to these forums.

Study: Black man and white felon – same chances for hire

Is racial discrimination a thing of the past?

Debates about the relevance of discrimination in today's society have been difficult to resolve, in part because of the challenges in identifying, measuring, and documenting its presence or absence in all but extreme cases. Discrimination is rarely something that can be observed explicitly.

To address these issues, I recently conducted a series of experiments investigating employment discrimination. In these experiments, which took place in Milwaukee and New York City, I hired young men to pose as job applicants, assigning them resumes with equal levels of education and experience, and sending them to apply for real entry-level job openings all over the city.

Team members also alternated presenting information about a fictitious criminal record (a drug felony), which they “fessed up to” on the application form. During nearly a year of fieldwork, teams of testers audited hundreds of employers, applying for a wide range of entry level jobs such as waiters, sales assistants, laborers, warehouse workers, couriers, and customer service representatives.

The results of these studies were startling. Among those with no criminal record, white applicants were more than twice as likely to receive a callback relative to equally qualified black applicants. Even more troubling, whites with a felony conviction fared just as well, if not better, than a black applicant with a clean background.

Funny that the racists around here cannot accept some simple facts.

[Karee 4,191]

That's utter bullshite. I shouldn't be surprised. It came from you after all. Bullshite is all you ever bring to these forums.

Funny that the racists around here cannot accept some simple facts.

Who wants to hire a black guy when he might scream racism every time something doesn't go his way? (See recent trial and the aftermath) What if you have to terminate him for some reason? Is he gonna come back and sue you for discrimination? That study didn't take that into account.

[Darnell 8,479]

Apparently all of these unemployed teens could be Obama's children,

so 'as the Father', I blame Obama.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Who wants to hire a black guy when he might scream racism every time something doesn't go his way? (See recent trial and the aftermath) What if you have to terminate him for some reason? Is he gonna come back and sue you for discrimination? That study didn't take that into account.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

As conspiracy theories goes, this one displays all the classic symptoms. Go on then, go for broke, tell us who benefits from this brilliant policy? Congressional Democrats? The Democratic Elite? Obama, that's where he gets all his voters? I have heard this one before of course, not least from you but it's not coming across as any more plausible now than it ever has.

I already told you, you already know. Look at the economic disparities and you see one of the beneficiaries.

So you think the reason that so many black teenagers are unemployed is because of the color of their skin? Are you seriously that blinded? Maybe it is because of their names?

What do you think the unemployment rate is among illegal immigrants who are not eligible for these benefits and who barely speak English? Lower? Or Higher? Is it because their skin is lighter brown? Can you even believe you are saying this yourself?

Of course politicians benefit from political programs. Would Sheila Jackson Lee have her job if not for welfare benefits? How many people need to be enslaved for her to keep a job? If they were educated and could choose where they lived, would she have a job?

Have you looked at the graphics of where crime occurs in Chicago, for example? It looks like a checkerboard. The lines of segregation could not be drawn more distinctly by law. People have much less regard for laws than they do for economic incentives. Economic incentives are more or less inviolate. People WILL do what you give them money to do.

What would you possibly have to disagree with me on? I am suggesting that people receive welfare where needed, but at the same time they should be required to attend school and/or have a job 40 hrs per week so that they gain the skills ansd education to no longer need welfare. What part of that do you oppose? And they should do so without penalty in their benefits.

What is wrong with that? Are you against education? Working experience? Are you opposed to helping families until they can do better for themselves?

Last December, 26 white school children were murdered in a suburb in CT. There was a nationwide demand to do something. As usual, congress did nothing...because it was politically detrimental to their jobs to do so. Since Trayvon Maritn was killed, 11,000 young, black males have been murdered. ELEVEN THOUSAND. what do we hear? Nothing. NOTHING. Are you seriously going to tell me that you do not think political considerations drive these decisions? They care about their jobs which could never be duplicated in the private sector. They do not give a rat's @ss about children, especially not black children. Black children need to be raised to be reliable voters. Blacks give more than 90% of their vote to Democrats! No other demographic is so predictable. There is a reason for it.

The KKK could never have imagined such an effective tool for segregating and enslaving any population of people as our current system. Now, you can believe it is a conspiracy or you can believe it is unintended consequences. Does it really matter? 41% unemployment, 3% of the population committing 55% of violent crime...mostly against each other! This is a KKK Grand Wizard's dream come true.

And YOU want it to continue?

It needs to be ended. Sheila Jackson Lee is not going to be in favor of that.

[Darnell 8,479]

Black Teen Unemployment Rate 41.6% ???

Really? I blame the parent or parents, and the pool of moral decay they swim (in).

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You have created your devil but it's not a credible one. This idea that Democrats sustain a system of social slavery in order to get votes just doesn't add up. Eliminating Democrats will not miraculously create Utopia. Democrats are not a universal evil to be attacked at every turn. This theory you adhere to is pretty insane.

How so?

What am I suggesting that you think is "insane"? Educating people? Are you opposed to education? People being able to work and earn money without penalizing their families financially while being away from them? Mr Big Dog has already told us he believe studies which show that education has nothing to do with whether people get a job or not. Do you agree with that? Blacks CAN'T because they are black?

What have I suggested that would be so terrible? Why are Democrats the ones that oppose it?

Edited August 3, 2013 by Gary and Alla

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

That's utter bullshite. I shouldn't be surprised. It came from you after all. Bullshite is all you ever bring to these forums.

Funny that the racists around here cannot accept some simple facts.

So you oppose educating people on welfare and allowing them to earn money without penalty because you believe it makes no difference?

Why would you be opposed to education? Work experience?

[Peikko 1,575]

How so?

What am I suggesting that you think is "insane"? Educating people? Are you opposed to education? People being able to work and earn money without penalizing their families financially while being away from them? Mr Big Dog has already told us he believe studies which show that education has nothing to do with whether people get a job or not. Do you agree with that? Blacks CAN'T because they are black?

What have I suggested that would be so terrible? Why are Democrats the ones that oppose it?

Surely you jest? You have produced no proof, no evidence, no reasonable hypothesis as to why Democrats are the big evil. You make up stuff, you draw conclusions from thin air and ask irrelevant questions yet you presumably believe you are constructing some fool proof case - that's the insanity.